Mid-fat. 27.5+ on the shore?

OK not a lot of traction here with this thread.
Perhaps next year a lot more people will have some 'plus' size experience.
I'm waiting to see good deals and what the range of competitive offerings is.
Now that Ibis, Scott, Norco have ones, I think this is getting interesting.
Hope to demo a FS 27.5+ version in the next few months and see how it compares.

Here's the scoop: Plus can change the way you ride trails. More traction and more comfort = taking silly lines that didn't exist before. For wet roots and rocks, you still need sticky tires. Once it dries up, regular tires are more than enough. The caveat is if your speeds exceed a certain level and you ride groomed trails at those speeds, the low PSI will work against you. Think railing a berm or hitting a jump at speed and folding the tire over.

Let's just say that like Fat bikes, 160mm Enduro machines, DH bikes, etc, Plus bikes have their time and place, and most of all type of rider. Plus bikes will outperform most trail bikes for the average user. Unfortunately there are lots of riders out there who will kid themselves and avoid Plus bikes because Jared Graves isn't going to race on one.

oh right - the other half of the time you're a crotchety old man who hates/fears change ;)

lol, okay…..mostly I'm just not a gear whore flirting about from this to that. I don't hate good change, I really don't like companies that oversell the qualities or attributes of new things and try to make them out to be things they aren't, though.

if 27.5 is the bees knees wheel size wouldn't a 26+ be a better wheel size for plus bikes

…

Thanks Ken, I think that's the most balanced (positive) take on Plus+ bikes I've read.

It's probably also reasonable to note that if you're the only guy on a Plus bike and your group is busting out a big ride you are definitely going to hurt notably more on the non-tech climbs?

lol, okay…..mostly I'm just not a gear whore flirting about from this to that. I don't hate good change, I really don't like companies that oversell the qualities or attributes of new things and try to make them out to be things they aren't, though.

I also suffer from a severe, and contagious, case of oversellitis. When I read the marketing crap that makes it sound like a product belongs on the shopping channel, not the trail, I generally dismiss it outright.

I'm quite happy with regular wheels (and have not loved my brief Plus experiences) but I know enough folks that have come around to it despite the marketing claims as opposed to because of them that I don't think it's going anywhere.

I will say, when I ask those guys why they haven't bought one yet I always get a variation of this:

there isn't a production 27.5+ bike i would buy yet, personally, but i'm keeping my eyes peeled.

… without any real explanation of what needs to change on the bikes for them to put down the cash.

if 27.5 is the bees knees wheel size wouldn't a 26+ be a better wheel size for plus bikes

That's what I keep thinking. I guess we'll get those in 2019. I don't want the added weight of a huge 27.5 tire and wide rim (unless one spends stupid amounts of cash), but a wider 26 that ends up being the same circumference as a normal 275 and in a reasonably light modern package makes sense to me. Oh well!

If I had to buy a Santa Cruz right now it would without a doubt be a Hightower.

That's what I keep thinking. I guess we'll get those in 2019. I don't want the added weight of a huge 27.5 tire and wide rim (unless one spends stupid amounts of cash), but a wider 26 that ends up being the same circumference as a normal 275 and in a reasonably light modern package makes sense to me. Oh well!

You want to push those heavy tires without the rollover of 29"?

No thanks.

If I had to buy a Santa Cruz right now it would without a doubt be a Hightower.

I think we're going to see a lot of bikes like this in the future, it seems pretty easy (and efficient for the manufacturers) to make a frame 27.5+/29 compatible.

I didi't even think it was an option about 6 months ago when I bought my last frame. If I did than cross-compatibility would have factored into my decision for sure. I like things to be flexible and would love to get 2 mountain bikes in my quiver. A FS trail niner and a HT 27.5+ that could also run the niner wheels would be awesome.

There's a pretty extensive niner/27.5+ compatibility thread over on MTBR. Hopefully someone tries a Rootdown or Surface soon so I can lust after more stuff I can't afford. :dizzy:

There are a bunch of fat bike frames (including mine) that can fit 27.5+, 29"reg, 29+ as well as 26fat, and by extension 26"reg although that would look weird.

With replaceable drop outs you could even keep the BB the same, or adjustable to your preference.

One bike to rule them all! (With 3 or 4 wheel sets…)

Yeah friends of mine back in the UK have been running Plus (2.8") on Camber's and Enduro's for a while.

It's too simple to say that when conditions are good a 2.3" is all you need. The ultimate grip level may be similar but there is a massive safe zone around the grip limit with Plus. It might not be the most efficient for trail riding or the outright fastest for DH on an AM bike (although I don't think anyone can categorically say that until the tires are optimised) but if I was going for a pootle about for a couple hours I would rather ride a 120/130mm Plus than anything. It's hilarious.

Everyone will have one or a compatible 29" in a couple years. I think for many it will be their only bike.

For beginners/intermediate riders and women (obviously not all women) who just want to have fun they're another world IMO. They'll be able to ride more trails, clear more climbs, and spend a lot more time on the bike than on their face.

I also suffer from a severe, and contagious, case of oversellitis. When I read the marketing crap that makes it sound like a product belongs on the shopping channel, not the trail, I generally dismiss it outright.

and that's the thing, ready any press or media or reviews of this latest and greatest and it reads like riding technical singletrack or cleaning loose climbs is, and has been, impossible on anything but these new semi-fat tires. It's embarrassing and reeks of cry wolf. Again, I'm really not against these for people who feel like they really benefit from it, I just wish they'd stop with the overblown, dishonest, hyperbole.

and that's the thing, ready any press or media or reviews of this latest and greatest and it reads like riding technical singletrack or cleaning loose climbs is, and has been, impossible on anything but these new semi-fat tires. It's embarrassing and reeks of cry wolf. Again, I'm really not against these for people who feel like they really benefit from it, I just wish they'd stop with the overblown, dishonest, hyperbole.

I totally agree regarding the hype but it's all relative. Todd on a + would definitely climb shit he's never done before.

I totally agree regarding the hype but it's all relative. Todd on a + would definitely climb shit he's never done before.

maybe, but the thought of those weakass sidewalls on the ensuing descent makes Todd on a + sad

I also suffer from a severe, and contagious, case of oversellitis. When I read the marketing crap that makes it sound like a product belongs on the shopping channel, not the trail, I generally dismiss it outright.

Yeah me too at times. I am still not convinced SRAM can make a brake that is reliable and easy to bleed. Or make rear derailleurs that work without needing frequent maintenance. Amazingly my Reverbs have all been really good and the Pike is also excellent. Most of the time my climbing limitation is lung power not traction. I do think that I would appreciate the cushion of low PSI descending chunky trails though. I can certainly see some benefit to a larger contact patch on rooty stuff. I'll have to ride one though before I decide.